Pages

12 May 2010

More George Porter: The Carpenter, The Prisoner

Turn-of-the-nineteenth-century George Porter in Upper Canada: One man, or two? Or three? Almost every researcher who pursues ancestry beyond their grandparents will find an example of this classic genealogical problem—“same name” occurrences in one general vicinity and time frame. The attempt to identify same-name individuals in any documented circumstances can lead into unexpected research routes and complicated associations. Previous posts outlined some of the known life of George Porter whom I will call The Carpenter: building one of the first dwellings in the town of York, and comparing his signatures with a later George Porter.

Alert readers generally concurred that the signature comparison seems to indicate two men, even if only by the formation of the capital G initial. And yet ... one G (in 1796) seems to “match” the 1814 signature. It’s on a petition stating George (The Carpenter) has a 26x18 dwelling frame ready for a York town lot. Not enough to assert that the later man might have been “our” George The Carpenter, returning like a ghost from an absence of fifteen years. If they are indeed two different men, their origins and ultimate fates are still a blank. Birth, parents, spouse, and death are the missing primary information in all but one instance.

The Carpenter
Most of the information in prior posts is not repeated here, but George Porter was evident in Newark and York between 1792 and 1799.[1] Self-described as a carpenter and a former sergeant of militia, he was busy claiming town lots in both communities while inhabiting a farm on the outskirts of York on the Don River. In 1795 a man of this name received a preliminary location ticket for lot 5 concession 3 in York Township.[2]
Only one George Porter ever shows up in the early York population lists which begin 1797. By the time he disappeared, George left behind in York his wife Dorothy (Vanalstine) Porter and three surviving small children. His wife may have remarried and lived out her days in Thorold Township on the Niagara peninsula. One of George’s post facto in-laws by marriage was Benjamin Fairchild, an interpreter in the Indian Department.[3]

The Prisoner
George Porter was in the York jail in February 1814, accused of stealing Indian property in the aftermath of General Procter’s 1813 retreat from the western settlements (again: here). The events for which he was arrested apparently took place in the Lake Erie area, London District. Several clues in his petition asking to be released were interesting.[4]One, he said he’d been in the province for 20 years, which takes him back to 1794. Two, he said he’d been recommended as a civilian employee to Colonel Gordon of the 26th Regiment. Gordon was the commander of the “upper” frontier posts for an undetermined time in the early 1790s.[5] Newark was a hub for the military presence. Carnochan reports Gordon’s attendance, along with Governor Simcoe, at an important Indian meeting in 1792 in Newark. [6] Gordon returned to Newark for the duration of the War of 1812. He had transferred to the Royal Scots regiment, on duty at Fort George. So George The Prisoner could have met with Col. Gordon before/during the War, ... or in the early 1790s. Three, George said he’d been granted lot 5 concession 1 in York Township, a strikingly similar description to what was supposedly one of The Carpenter’s claims in 1795. Was the slight change in concession number maybe a memory lapse after some twenty years? Whatever, lot 5 in the 1st concession east of Yonge Street “with broken front East of the River Don” was firmly in the hands of a William Cooper from 1794 to 1799.[7] Four, George’s petition—a number of lines on the right hand side drifting into illegibility—referred to “one dagard[,] a person who had left his family at P[resk] Isle and came there and Lived with a squaw ...”. Essentially, he blamed “Dagard’s” woman for his current incarceration.

Indications are that this man had spent time in Newark (and possibly York) before 1800. His close association with Indians during the War of 1812 may have developed much, much earlier. He is quite likely the man in Delaware Township, London District, in 1809, owing a small tax.[8] George The Prisoner was released on 15 July 1814 by the Court of King’s Bench on a writ of habeus corpus, along with Joseph Fowler and Jacob Decowr (sic), all of the London District.[9] Clearly, their offenses were insignificant relative to the hanging that some traitors faced. One wonders if “Decor” could be interpreted as “Dagard.”

You can spot many puzzling and frustrating items in the stories thus far. It would seem doubtful to us that a man would desert his family in York only to have the nerve to start another life off in the London District. Word would get around! And yet while they seem like two different men, there are potential (real?) intersections in their lives.

Disclaimer: This is an exercise to keep the brain fog at bay; I have no vested interest in the characters. Maybe a proper article will eventually form itself from this intermittent series of musings. Reasonably exhaustive research sometimes looks endless. In order keep this post a reasonable length, more posts will be upcoming as the circle widens around the targets.
NEXT: Persons of Interest: The Rifleman! The Surveyor! The Blacksmith! The Doctor!
... all Porters, all in the same places.